[Fluffy]

---

Scoring: Match points.

[dake50]

5xD +5xC +SA+HA looks the minimum I'd expect from this hand.
Try 4c over 3Nt, if that shows the double fit,
OR invites partner to 4D asking D-keys,
even 4D IF that asks keys.

[helene_t]

I would pass. Partner wouldn't just bid 3NT with significant extras so most likely we have two losers in the minors.

[Trinidad]

I expect something like ♠-♥Qxx♦Kxxxx♣AKxxx opposite. Then I prefer 3NT over 6♦.

Rik

[aguahombre]

Yep. 3NT was putting on the brakes. She wouldn't do that even with a minimum containing all primes. Auction over.

[gszes]

My main concern here isn't so much are we missing
slam but is 3N really the best spot. With a hand similar
to void KQx Axxxx Kxxxx opener would have been much
more inclined to rebid 2n rather than showing the 5th
club. This bidding makes it seem like opener has a
lot less confidence about NT since they were willing to
show a normally usless 5th club in favor of NT.

This strongly suggests their heart stop is 1 or maybe
even less like QTx or Qxx. Given this thinking 5d may be
a vastly superior contract than 3n. There is also the
possibility that p is stronger and needs a little pushing
to consider 6. IMO we should cater to both possibilites
and bid

4H

I dislike the idea of a 4c bid here because it sounds too much
like a cue bid for dia ----this false idea might cause p to consider
Kxxxxx as a no loser suit and cause them to soar when they should
be more cautious. I think the 4h bid caters to hands ranging from
x Kx Axxxx Kxxxx through x Kx AKxxx KQxxx with the stronger
landing in 6d and the weaker landing in 5d. There are probably
some holdings where 3n is right but 5d will do just as well almost
every time and maybe even 6d will have a shot. Too small a target
to try for the top MP spot of 3n be happy with good results on this
hand rather than trying for miracles.

[Fluffy]

I spent like 2 minutes trying to unfold partner's hand.
I was almost sure partner had ♥Kx with 5-5 minors, although 1345 couldn't be discarded.

Trying for slam was out of the picture, we had shown a very strong 4SF+support hand, and he has made a sing off. Our hand is very minimum on our context and we could have a lot more. It is true that slam could still be good if it is on 2 finesses (♦AJ, ♣AQ or ♦AK, ♣A9). But that is unlikely.

What it is not unlikely is that 5m outscores 3NT, Because we need to lose 2 tricks on the minors before we can make 9 in NT and the opponents run hearts, or because we lose 3 tricks due to bad luck and 5m-1 is better than 3NT-2 or -3. If you also put a hand such as x-Kxx-AKxx-Kxxxx where 5m is good, but 3NT is almost hopeless I think the decision is easy. But there are also some hands such as x Kx AKxxx K9xxx where ♣Q allocation will mean either 12 tricks in NT, or i fit fails, ♠[K can still bring the 9th to tie with 5m.

Anyway, after much though I decide to jump to 5♦. Partner complained after he saw ♥Ax saying that I was playing against the field which is crazy. He later looked at his hand and ended up complaining that ♠K was onside to give 3NT an average instead of a bottom against 5m, he had

♠x
♥Kx
♦AKxxx
♣Q9xxx

Yes, a club lead (low doubleton on this hand) beats 5♦, but lets face it, single dummy you'd always prefer to play 5m over 3NT. Not sure which minor is best in theory or practice. The hand was flat with only +600 scores all around.

[Fluffy]

Also interesting for me: I have no clue if 4♣ should be natural or cue, and 5♣ should be COG or exclusion. What do you guys think?

[Zelandakh]

Fluffy, on 2013-June-25, 09:54, said:

Also interesting for me: I have no clue if 4♣ should be natural or cue, and 5♣ should be COG or exclusion. What do you guys think?

One option:-

4♣ = demands cue bids with 4♦ being a club cue
4♦ = slam try KCB
4♥ = RKCB
4♠ = no idea, XRKCB for a club void I suppose
4NT = natural
5♣ = cog

[Fluffy]

too specific for this unnusual auction IMO

[Zelandakh]

That depends on your agreement Fluffy. When agreeing diamonds at the 4 level and having 4♣ available, it is quite possible to play this as your standard structure. I have also posted it on BBF before. The 4♠ bid is clearly specific to this auction but I think I made that clear by writing "no idea".

[cherdano]

Why is everyone worried about hearts? 3N is down on a spade lead pretty much whenever ♠K is off-side.
Even at matchpoints I much prefer 5♦ over 3N.

[Codo]

The chances to fail in 3 ♥ are much smaller then the chance to miss a game with this strong East-Hand....

[gnasher]

Fluffy, on 2013-June-25, 09:54, said:

Also interesting for me: I have no clue if 4♣ should be natural or cue, and 5♣ should be COG or exclusion. What do you guys think?

4♣ is a cue-bid and 5♣ is Exclusion. If you planned to support clubs opposite a 3NT bid, you could just have raised 3♣ to 4♣.

[cherdano]

gnasher, on 2013-July-02, 09:40, said:

4♣ is a cue-bid and 5♣ is Exclusion. If you planned to support clubs opposite a 3NT bid, you could just have raised 3♣ to 4♣.

Unless 3♦ was an advance cue, and 4♣ sets trumps.

ADVANCE CUE MADNESS HAS TO STOP! NOW!!

[aguahombre]

cherdano, on 2013-July-02, 09:47, said:

Unless 3♦ was an advance cue, and 4♣ sets trumps.

ADVANCE CUE MADNESS HAS TO STOP! NOW!!

An advance cue in partner's first suit and then trying to set clubs as trump would truly be madness and worthy of upper case.

[JLOGIC]

cherdano, on 2013-July-02, 06:26, said:

Why is everyone worried about hearts? 3N is down on a spade lead pretty much whenever ♠K is off-side.
Even at matchpoints I much prefer 5♦ over 3N.

Do you mean opposite the actual hand or in general? I am not so sure in general, we have potential for overtricks in 3N. I mean, change partners actual hand slightly to x Kx AKxxx K9xxx and I would rather be in 3N I think because if the CQ is on we are making overtricks in NT and if it's not we can fall back on the spade hook for a push. There are also hands where we have 3 heart stoppers where I'd take my chances in 3N probably. I thought this was a pretty difficult choice because of MP.

[JLOGIC]

gnasher, on 2013-July-02, 09:40, said:

4♣ is a cue-bid and 5♣ is Exclusion. If you planned to support clubs opposite a 3NT bid, you could just have raised 3♣ to 4♣.

This is not as clear as you make it out imo either, when partner bids 3N you might simply be pulling because of spade weakness whereas you were planning to bid 3N over 3S. Pretty contrived hand but Jxxxx AJT KQ Qxx seems reasonable to bid 3D then 4C natural over 3N but 3N over 3S.. This might depend how you play 3H over 3C, if it's a punt then there is no problem but I assume many would play it as 5-5 GF if they don't play 3H over 2C as showing that.

[cherdano]

JLOGIC, on 2013-July-02, 16:41, said:

Do you mean opposite the actual hand or in general? I am not so sure in general, we have potential for overtricks in 3N. I mean, change partners actual hand slightly to x Kx AKxxx K9xxx and I would rather be in 3N I think because if the CQ is on we are making overtricks in NT and if it's not we can fall back on the spade hook for a push. There are also hands where we have 3 heart stoppers where I'd take my chances in 3N probably. I thought this was a pretty difficult choice because of MP.

But you can also go down in 3N on a spade lead. Yes 3N will be a great score if we have a double stop in the suit they lead, and we can set up both minors with one loser. And maybe I am too worried about a spade lead, I guess a heart lead still seems normal on this auction. But I think it's more likely that we are just making game, with a higher risk of going down in 3N.

[Fluffy]

I also though of ♣K9xxx but it was kinda specific, but it is not that much better in 3NT, 50% of the time it will be better, but 25% 5m will win (even more if LHO wins ♣A from ♣AQ, wich was not the case of the actual opponents in place).

He might also have ♣AKxxx where 5m captures ♣Q98x and 3N doesn't, and actually any holding with 2 losers in the minors is better placed at 5m than 3NT. Then I wondered if some 1345 hand was possible, if they were, I would much rather play in 5m than 3NT, this should be unlikelly, and in our context diamonds should have better quality than clubs.